Annie Korzen, an American actress known for her viral TikTok video featuring the phrase “was it crispy,” has accused the brand Maxibon of using her video in an advertisement without her consent. The original TikTok sound, created during the pandemic, has garnered 16.8 million views and has been utilized in over 14,000 other videos.

In a recent TikTok post, Korzen expressed her concern about not being credited or compensated for the use of her image and words in a collaboration between Maxibon and Krispy Kreme. She described this situation as disturbing and questioned whether larger corporations take advantage of individuals like herself, particularly older women.

Korzen clarified that she does not hold Krispy Kreme responsible for the issue but is advocating for fairness, credit, compensation, and respect. She noted that attempts to contact Maxibon yielded no response. In the comments on the advertisement video posted by Maxibon Australia, she reiterated that she was neither paid nor credited for her contribution to their ad campaign.

Original article

Here is an analysis of the article's value to the reader:

Actionable Information: The article does not provide any direct steps or instructions for the reader to take. It merely informs about Annie Korzen's accusation and her experience with Maxibon's alleged misuse of her content. There are no tools or resources mentioned that readers can utilize to take action or resolve similar issues.

Educational Depth: While the article shares an interesting story, it does not delve deeply into the legal or ethical aspects of content usage rights. It does not educate readers on the potential consequences of such actions or the processes involved in seeking compensation or credit. The depth of understanding is limited to the specific incident and does not provide broader insights into intellectual property rights or online content usage.

Personal Relevance: The topic of content misuse and the need for credit and compensation is relevant to content creators, especially those who share their work online. It highlights the potential risks and rewards of viral content and the importance of understanding one's rights. However, for the average reader who is not a content creator, the personal relevance is limited. It may serve as a cautionary tale, but it does not directly impact their daily lives or decision-making processes.

Public Service Function: The article does not serve an immediate public service function. It does not provide official warnings, safety advice, or emergency contacts. While it brings attention to a potential issue, it does not offer solutions or resources for the public to address similar situations. It primarily serves an informative purpose rather than a direct public service role.

Practicality of Advice: As the article does not offer specific advice or steps, the practicality of its content is not applicable. It does not guide readers on how to navigate similar situations or provide strategies for content creators to protect their work.

Long-Term Impact: The article's long-term impact is minimal. It does not provide insights or actions that can lead to lasting positive changes. While it may raise awareness about content rights, it does not offer a comprehensive guide or plan for content creators to safeguard their work or seek justice in similar situations.

Emotional or Psychological Impact: The article may evoke emotions such as empathy or frustration for Annie Korzen's situation. It highlights the potential power imbalance between individuals and larger corporations, which could resonate with readers. However, it does not provide strategies or tools to help readers process or address such emotions constructively.

Clickbait or Ad-Driven Words: The article does not appear to use sensational or misleading language to grab attention. It presents the story in a straightforward manner, focusing on the facts and Korzen's experience.

Missed Chances to Teach or Guide: The article could have been more valuable if it included information on the legal aspects of content usage rights, especially in the context of viral online content. It could have provided links to resources or guides on how content creators can protect their work and seek compensation. Additionally, including real-life examples or case studies of successful resolutions to similar issues could have offered practical guidance to readers.

The issue of Annie Korzen's viral content being used without her consent by a corporate entity highlights a potential erosion of trust and respect within local communities. When individuals or groups fail to uphold their duties and responsibilities towards each other, it weakens the fabric of kinship bonds that are essential for the survival and well-being of families and communities.

In this case, the lack of response from Maxibon to Korzen's attempts at communication demonstrates a disregard for the basic principles of fairness and respect. This behavior, if left unchecked and unaddressed, can lead to a breakdown of trust between community members, especially when it involves the exploitation of an individual's creativity and image for commercial gain.

The protection of children and elders, a fundamental duty of families and communities, is also at stake here. When larger entities take advantage of individuals without regard for their consent or compensation, it sets a precedent that could potentially lead to further exploitation and neglect of vulnerable community members. This could result in a shift of family responsibilities onto distant and impersonal corporations, weakening the ability of families to care for their own.

Furthermore, the lack of credit and compensation for Korzen's contribution to the ad campaign undermines the value of her work and the potential benefits it could bring to her family and community. This behavior, if normalized, could discourage individuals from creating and sharing their talents, thus diminishing the cultural and creative wealth of the community.

The consequences of such actions, if they become widespread, are dire. They could lead to a society where trust and respect are eroded, where the vulnerable are exploited, and where the duties and responsibilities of families and communities are neglected. This would result in a breakdown of the social structures that support procreative families, potentially leading to a decline in birth rates and a disruption of the continuity of the people and their stewardship of the land.

Restitution in this case would involve Maxibon acknowledging their mistake, apologizing to Korzen, and fairly compensating her for the use of her content. This would not only repair the trust between the parties involved but also set a precedent for respectful and ethical behavior within the community.

If such behaviors are allowed to spread unchecked, the consequences for families, children, community trust, and the stewardship of the land would be severe. It would lead to a society where personal duties are neglected, where the vulnerable are left unprotected, and where the survival of the people and their connection to the land is threatened.

"Korzen clarified that she does not hold Krispy Kreme responsible for the issue..."

This sentence uses passive voice to shift blame away from Krispy Kreme. It makes it seem like Korzen is letting them off the hook, when in reality, she is advocating for fairness and credit. The sentence suggests that Krispy Kreme is not at fault, which could mislead readers into thinking the company is innocent. By using passive voice, it downplays Korzen's concerns and shifts focus from the potential wrongdoing.

The text conveys a range of emotions, primarily from Annie Korzen, the actress whose viral TikTok video was allegedly used without her consent. Korzen expresses concern and frustration about the situation, which is evident in her choice of words and the tone of her message. Her concern is directed towards the lack of credit and compensation, indicating a sense of unease and worry about the fairness of the collaboration. The strength of her emotion is moderate to strong, as she describes the situation as "disturbing" and questions the intentions of larger corporations.

Korzen's anger and indignation are also evident as she advocates for fairness and respect. She feels wronged and is standing up for her rights, which is a powerful emotion that can evoke sympathy from readers. By expressing her anger, she aims to draw attention to the issue and potentially inspire others to support her cause. The emotion of anger here serves to highlight the injustice and create a sense of urgency, encouraging readers to take notice and perhaps even take action.

The text also conveys a sense of disappointment and betrayal. Korzen's original TikTok sound, which gained significant popularity, was a creative endeavor that likely brought her joy and a sense of accomplishment. However, the alleged misuse of her content has turned this positive experience into a negative one, leaving her feeling let down and perhaps even violated. This emotion is a powerful tool to evoke empathy from readers, as it humanizes Korzen's experience and makes her struggle more relatable.

Additionally, Korzen's message conveys a hint of fear and vulnerability. She questions whether larger corporations take advantage of individuals, particularly older women, indicating a sense of powerlessness and a fear of being exploited. This emotion adds a layer of complexity to the narrative, as it not only highlights the specific issue at hand but also speaks to a broader concern about the potential abuse of power in the entertainment industry.

The writer's use of emotion is strategic and effective. By focusing on Korzen's personal experience and her emotional response, the writer humanizes the story and makes it more engaging. The repetition of key phrases like "was it crispy" and the emphasis on Korzen's lack of credit and compensation create a sense of familiarity and urgency. The writer also employs a personal tone, allowing Korzen to speak directly to the reader, which builds a connection and encourages readers to invest emotionally in her cause.

Furthermore, the writer's choice of words, such as "disturbing" and "take advantage," adds a layer of intensity to the narrative, making it more compelling and thought-provoking. By using these emotional tools, the writer aims to capture the reader's attention, evoke empathy, and potentially inspire them to join Korzen's advocacy for fairness and respect in the entertainment industry.